Cantrip Auto-Scaling - A 5e Critique

[Mouseferatu]

I'd just like to point out something else.

Cantrips are a limited resource. In some ways, even more so than spells. They're just limited on a different scale, and the choices are made at a different time.

Wizards gain two new spells automatically every level, and can potentially gain a lot more than that. Clerics and druids have access to entire spell lists. Yes, the spells they can cast on a given day are limited, but their options in terms of access are exceedingly broad, and can be changed on a daily basis.

Cantrips? You get a small handful of them, ever. You cannot pick up new ones to add to your spellbook. You cannot, by the rules, ever swap the out. You pick your tiny selection, maybe get a couple of new ones over the course of many levels, and that's it. You're done, you're locked in, and you can never swap them out or expand your options.

It's a different sort of limit, but it's still a limited resource.

 

[Thyrwyn]

Thank you [MENTION=1288]Mouseferatu[/MENTION] - I was just going to add that.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Then let me try to explain this. Saying a level 1 spell upcast using a 2nd or 3rd level spellslot does more damage than a cantrip and that this makes up for level 1 spells not doing more damage than a cantrip when cast as a level 1 spell might be the silliest counter-point I've ever read. It doesn't address my reasons at all. It's basically talking past me.

A level 1 spell is an ability that requires a spell slot resource to use. Such an ability can be used with a level 1 spell slot resource. Anything that takes a flipping resource should do more than something that doesn't (common sense game design 101). That's what's being said and that's why it's silly to talk about upscaling as any kind of counter point to this.

You are blatantly ignoring the actual points people are making, and then condescending to people as if we just don’t get what you’re saying.

No cantrip deals damage without any roll to determine success, or does half damage on a miss, or hits in a line or cone or whatever for meaningful damage per target. A level 1 spell, cast at level 1, is better than a cantrip. It doesn’t need to do more damage for that to be true.

But also, again, your basic premise, that any limited resource should always be better than any at will ability, isn’t self evident, and you haven’t really done anything to support it.

 

[cbwjm]

At character level 11, when cantrips scale up for the second time, you could also say that all 1st level spell slots become 2nd level spell slots. That would mean that an 11th level full caster would have 7 2nd level spell slots. At level 17, you could do this upgrade again so that all 2nd level spell slots become 3rd level giving a full caster 10 3rd level spell slots to spend on any 1st to 3rd level spell. It might mean you see a few more fireballs thrown around because of this but at that level, I'm pretty much okay with that.

 

[WhosDaDungeonMaster]

I don't recall if anyone as mentioned this point or not, but something else you should consider is since cantrips are unlimited, casters utilize them all the time. With such an enormous amount of repetition, it makes since they would naturally be better with them as they level up.

If the increased damage bothers you, perhaps you could grant a different benefit? Maybe grant them a +1 attack and damage bonus at each boost, increase save DCs by 1, or grant additional targets.

 

[Giltonio_Santos]

Damage cantrips work to keep a caster's "auto attack" mode relevant at higher levels. 5e is a much better game with scaling cantrips and could turn much worse without them.

Remove the damage scaling and they'll have to use their spell slots (or worse yet: light crossbow shots) to keep from doing nothing in a round where spending a finite resource would not be advised, such as when the combat is not finished yet, but under control. You could compensate it by increasing the number of level 1-2 slots for casters in your game, at a risk that players would opt to just hit enemies with light crossbow shots and spam level 1-2 utility spells.

You can increase the damage of level 1-2 spells instead, but then you're making higher level spells worse by comparison. If that makes you feel uneasy, you'll end up increasing their damage as well, and then you'll have to increase damage done by non-caster characters if you want to keep balance working across different classes. Once you've implemented all of that, you'll have to increase monster HP if you don't want to make your combats shorter.

I don't think that's worth the effort.

 

[FrogReaver]

At character level 11, when cantrips scale up for the second time, you could also say that all 1st level spell slots become 2nd level spell slots. That would mean that an 11th level full caster would have 7 2nd level spell slots. At level 17, you could do this upgrade again so that all 2nd level spell slots become 3rd level giving a full caster 10 3rd level spell slots to spend on any 1st to 3rd level spell. It might mean you see a few more fireballs thrown around because of this but at that level, I'm pretty much okay with that.

That also makes the non damage spells better and they don’t need to be better

 

[CapnZapp]

You are blatantly ignoring the actual points people are making, and then condescending to people as if we just don’t get what you’re saying.

<snip>

But also, again, your basic premise, that any limited resource should always be better than any at will ability, isn’t self evident, and you haven’t really done anything to support it.

And let me add that that even if "limited should trump unlimited" should be true/evident etc, I've argued that while cantrips might outdamage certain level 1 spells, that doesn't mean cantrips are necessarily better than level 1 slots.

 

[FrogReaver]

You are blatantly ignoring the actual points people are making, and then condescending to people as if we just don’t get what you’re saying.

Only the points that have nothing to do with what I’m saying. Being able to upcast level 1 spells had no bearing on whether casting them at level 1 should do more than a cantrip.

See below for how I handle halfway plausible points.

No cantrip deals damage without any roll to determine success, or does half damage on a miss, or hits in a line or cone or whatever for meaningful damage per target. A level 1 spell, cast at level 1, is better than a cantrip. It doesn’t need to do more damage for that to be true.

I’m not convinced such properties make level 1 damage spells better than cantrips but it’s a good point because if true then it resolves my stated issue.

But also, again, your basic premise, that any limited resource should always be better than any at will ability, isn’t self evident, and you haven’t really done anything to support it.

I thought it was trivial. If a resource limited ability doesn’t do more than a resource unlimited ability then there’s never a reason to use the resource limited ability.

 

[FarBeyondC]

I thought it was trivial. If a resource limited ability doesn’t do more than a resource unlimited ability then there’s never a reason to use the resource limited ability.

True.

And if this were always the case in 5e, that would be a problem worth trying to solve. This is currently not the case, however. And while never having a reason to use a resource limited ability because a resource unlimited ability is just better is something I can see as a problem (even if I don't personally consider it one), I'd simply let the prospective spell caster* trade said now 'useless' spell for a different one (even if their class doesn't normally allow for that).

*Unless they're a wizard, because wizard.